<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
On 05/21/2012 12:55 PM, Fabrício de Novaes Kucinskis wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:007001cd377a$ebc27560$c3476020$@dea.inpe.br"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered
medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:black;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Pré-formatação HTML Char";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:black;}
span.EstiloDeEmail17
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:windowtext;}
span.Pr-formataoHTMLChar
{mso-style-name:"Pré-formatação HTML Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Pré-formatação HTML";
font-family:Consolas;
color:black;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
span.EstiloDeEmail20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:70.85pt 3.0cm 70.85pt 3.0cm;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif][if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D" lang="EN-US">Hi
Joel, and thanks for your answer,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D" lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D" lang="EN-US">The
“one second” reference I used is real time (ERC32 BSP). When
simulating (SIS BSP), things run a little faster. But not as
fast as what we are seeing now.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D" lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D" lang="EN-US">We
checked (both a dump of the .exe and with a breakpoint at
Clock_isr), and the fast idle mode is not #included in the
application compiled for SIS. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D" lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D" lang="EN-US">Could
this be a side-effect of the nanoseconds change? I don’t
think so, as we’re not enabling the extension. But don’t
know where else to look for.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D" lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
I don't think so either. The timer should be programmed with the same
value<br>
on both sis and real hardware. <br>
<br>
That's the only thing to check.<br>
<br>
By any chance did the version of gdb change? Or did the binary
change?<br>
I am thinking that an sis with 64-bit internal cycle counter might
be faster<br>
than the version with 32-bit internal cycle counter.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:007001cd377a$ebc27560$c3476020$@dea.inpe.br"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D" lang="EN-US">We
also compiled the same application with both versions of
RTEMS and run in an ERC32 board. Both run at the same
1-second interval. As this is our main target, the issue
with the simulator shouldn’t bother us too much. But I think
it’s always important to report to the list when something
doesn’t work as expected – maybe the observed behavior point
to something to be improved or fixed.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D" lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D" lang="EN-US">Thanks
again,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D" lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D" lang="EN-US">Fabrício.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D" lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D" lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D" lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext;mso-fareast-language:PT-BR">De:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext;mso-fareast-language:PT-BR">
Joel Sherrill [<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:joel.sherrill@oarcorp.com">mailto:joel.sherrill@oarcorp.com</a>] <br>
<b>Enviada em:</b> segunda-feira, 21 de maio de 2012
11:26<br>
<b>Para:</b> Fabrício de Novaes Kucinskis<br>
<b>Cc:</b> 'RTEMS Users'<br>
<b>Assunto:</b> Re: Different tick interval with the
same application between RTEMS 4.10.0 and 4.10.2?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 05/21/2012 08:49 AM, Fabrício de Novaes
Kucinskis wrote: <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Hi all,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">We've just upgraded our
development environment from RTEMS 4.10.0 to RTEMS 4.10.2.
As always, an interesting issue has raised! ;-)</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">We use the ERC32 and SIS
BSPs. After the upgrade, a simple test application that
prints a clock once per second started to print the clock
values almost two times faster on SIS. The application gets
the number of ticks per second and uses it in the
rtems_task_wake_after directive.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif";mso-fareast-language:PT-BR">When
on any simulator, there is always the possibility that
somehow the fast idle mode<br>
in the clock driver got turned on.<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">To determine if the
issue was on SIS or RTEMS, we run in the 4.10.2 environment
the previous version of the test, compiled with RTEMS
4.10.0, and the task runs once per second. Also, the number
of ticks per second reported in both versions is the same.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif";mso-fareast-language:PT-BR"><br>
Is this once per second in simulated or real time?<br>
<br>
Set a break point at Clock_isr and see if it is doing the
fast idle mode.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Looking at the release
notes, we've found a number of changes/fixes related with
ticks and time since 4.10.0. But it seems that none of them
is related to what I report here.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif";mso-fareast-language:PT-BR">I
looked at the diff files and the only changes are fixing
bugs <br>
related to nanoseconds since last tick when you ask on the<br>
edge of a tick interrupt occurring.<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Is this something to be
expected when upgrading? Am I missing some change in the
configuration?</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Thanks in advance and
best regards,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Fabrício de Novaes
Kucinskis.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman","serif";mso-fareast-language:PT-BR"><br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<pre>-- <o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>Joel Sherrill, Ph.D. Director of Research& Development<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:joel.sherrill@OARcorp.com">joel.sherrill@OARcorp.com</a> On-Line Applications Research<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS Huntsville AL 35805<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre> Support Available (256) 722-9985<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><o:p> </o:p></pre>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Joel Sherrill, Ph.D. Director of Research& Development
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:joel.sherrill@OARcorp.com">joel.sherrill@OARcorp.com</a> On-Line Applications Research
Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS Huntsville AL 35805
Support Available (256) 722-9985
</pre>
</body>
</html>